Groups Push Back on Proposed Massachusetts Pole Attachment Timeline

May 28, 2026 – Telecommunications trade groups are pushing back against proposed Massachusetts pole attachment rules, warning state regulators that lengthy timelines and weak enforcement mechanisms could slow broadband deployment and jeopardize federal funding opportunities.

The debate centers on a proposed rulemaking underway at the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities and Department of Telecommunications and Cable to modernize the state’s pole attachment framework.

Under Section 224 of the Communications Act, the Federal Communications Commission regulates pole attachments unless a state chooses to oversee the process itself. Massachusetts is one of several “reverse preemption” states that administers its own pole attachment rules rather than relying on federal oversight.

The proposal would establish new categories for pole attachment applications based on project size, ranging from “small orders” involving up to 50 poles to “very large orders” involving more than 5,000 poles. State regulators said the changes are intended to better reflect modern broadband deployment needs and improve management of large-scale fiber projects.

The efforts of the proposed rules were applauded by DTC Commissioner Karen Charles who believes the efforts of the program will help connect institutions to funding in the BEAD program.

Conversely, Massachusetts Broadband Institute Director Michael Baldino said earlier this year the state views pole attachments and make-ready work as a major obstacle to broadband expansion.

“Timelines are important, and again, useful, but departments need to make clear that there are enforcement mechanisms,” said Matt DeTora , senior counsel for external and state affairs at CTIA, at a public hearing yesterday. He argued the proposed “shot clocks” would still allow significantly more time for processing applications than current FCC rules in other jurisdictions.

Tim Wilkerson , chief executive officer of the New England Connectivity and Telecommunications Association, warned the proposal could make Massachusetts less attractive for broadband investment.

“Currently, Massachusetts lacks timelines for pole access, unlike our surrounding certified states and FCC regulated states,” Wilkerson said. “The current lack of rules for pole access makes deployment unnecessarily onerous today, but the proposed rules will exacerbate already lengthy time frames.”

Wilkerson said NECTA estimates that under existing FCC frameworks, mid-sized attachment projects could be completed approximately 67 days faster than under the proposed Massachusetts rules, even before accounting for local permitting delays.